As a mobile client author I would be really in favor of this. It always seemed 
inelegant to restart streams and requires a parser reset. It also makes the 
state machine that describes the connection procedure less complicated and we 
always try to make things simple on the XMPP client side at least.
 
I would be interested in seeing what the new stanza flow looks like too.



> Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2008 13:56:45 -0600> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: 
> [email protected]> Subject: [Standards] stream restarts> > A few weeks ago I 
> got to talking with Joe Hildebrand and Travis Shirk at> Jabber Inc. about 
> stream restarts. Once upon a time we thought we needed> them (e.g., so that 
> the server would be sure to forget about any data it> received before 
> STARTTLS completed), but now we realize that was a> misunderstanding of the 
> TLS and SASL specs. So it seems that we could> redefine the stream 
> negotiation process to get rid of stream restarts> after STARTTLS and SASL 
> negotiation. The conclusion that Joe and Travis> and I came to is that we 
> could do this by defining new features for> STARTTLS and SASL negotiation. So 
> a server that supports old STARTTLS> and "STARTTLS2" would advertise both 
> features. If you choose STARTTLS2,> you would not restart the stream and the 
> server would not expect you to> do so. But if you support STARTTLS you would 
> use that and both sides> would expect the stream restarts. IMHO the new 
> features would use> namespaces like urn:xmpp:starttls instead of the 
> namespaces in the IETF> tree, but that's a minor detail (the important point 
> is that the xmlns> would be different).> > If there are no objections to this 
> idea, I'll write up a little XEP or> two about this.> > Peter> > -- > Peter 
> Saint-Andre> https://stpeter.im/> 
_________________________________________________________________
Make i'm yours.  Create a custom banner to support your cause.
http://im.live.com/Messenger/IM/Contribute/Default.aspx?source=TXT_TAGHM_MSN_Make_IM_Yours

Reply via email to